EPA Reporting Requirements for Proposed Pre-Treatment Rule
by Alexander Bischoff - Editor Open4Energy, Open4BioClean & Operation Savannah
We are four months away from the date on which the proposed new amalgam separator rule becomes effective. There has been no word from the EPA since public comment closed in February 2015. We do know that regulatory procedure requires that the EPA respond to each of the 212 public comments filed. So I anticipate an announcement delaying the effective date soon!
I find it particularly interesting to see evacuation system manufacturers jockey to promote their products under the new rule! Every cloud may have a silver lining. Rules usually costs money. How interesting that dentists might actually save money through this increased awareness of their evacuation system!
The EPA has the regulatory authority to proceed according to the regulatory process. The only way I know for the rule to be blocked is a challenge to the EPA's authority in court. At date of writing, I know of no legal objection to the rule that has been filed. Speculation is mostly a waste of effort. But I have given my opinion on what is likely to happen in my editorial.
Registration with POTW's
EPA is proposing to amend selected parts of the General Pretreatment Regulations to create a new category of industrial user. Called a Dental Industrial User (DIU) with streamlined oversight.
Where the publicly owned treatment works (POTW) finds that an Industrial User (IU) meets the criteria for classification as a Dental Industrial User (DIU), the POTW must evaluate, at least once per year, whether the IU meets the criteria in § 403.3(v)(4).
In the event that the POTW determines that a DIU does not meet the criteria in § 403.3(v)(4), the POTW must immediately begin enforcement in accordance with its enforcement response plan. If the dental discharger has not returned to compliance within 90 days of the initial noncompliance, the POTW may no longer treat the dental discharger as a DIU and must treat the dental discharger as a SIU. Upon verification by the POTW through an inspection and a finding that the dental discharger has complied with all of the applicable requirements in § 403.3(v)(4), the dental discharger may be considered a DIU.
In English: Every dental office that extracts amalgam fillings, will be required to register with their local waste water treatment facility within 180 days of the rule being made effective.
Best Management Practices
Weekly Cleaning
Chair-side traps that may drain to a sewer must be cleaned with non-bleach, non-chlorine containing cleaners that have a pH of 6 to 8.
Such cleaning must be conducted at least weekly!
Evacuation System Cleaning
Amalgam-mercury captured as particulates in an amalgam separator can "solubilize" into methylmercury and bypass the amalgam separator.
The EPA has included a BMP, which requires that cleaners which come into contact with particulate mercury in traps, lines, pipes and the amalgam separator, are non-oxidizing, non-bleach, chlorine free and neutral ( range 6 to 8) pH.
Amalgam Separator Inspection
EPA proposes that dental offices report monthly that the technology they have installed is working according the manufacturers specifications.
The Amalgam separator is to be inspected at least once per month to ensure proper operation and maintenance, including confirmation that amalgam process waste water is flowing through the retaining cartridge, separator canister, or amalgam separating portion of the amalgam separator (preventing bypass).
Is regularly maintained by replacing the amalgam retaining cartridge(s), separator canister(s), or separator unit(s) whenever the collection of retained solids reaches the manufacturer's stated design capacity or annually, whichever comes first.
In the event that the separator is found to not be functioning properly, is repaired or replaced according to manufacturer instructions.
Saving Costs with New Cleaners
Microbial Science
Guaranteed stable suction is critical for all patient procedures. A system slogging down during a busy day will disrupt production and trigger a series of costly panic ‘fix it” activities. There is a different approach to cleaning available that meets the requirements of teh EPA rule. It is the use of microbes to optimize nature’s processes of digesting organic waste away.
It is not some new idea being tested. Bio-Pure, who lead this approach, has fifteen plus years of the highest pedigree research behind it. Including a recommendation for Dr Gorden Christensen of Clinicians Report. The saving in staff time by reducing the treatment cycle to bi-weekly, and the elimination of smelly chair side trap cleaning is hard to quantify. While the direct product costs are typically costs significantly less than most brand name chemical cleaners. It is the guaranteed improved suction and reduction in amalgam waste that really makes this micro biological solution so appealing.
From the Editor
As I said in my opening, speculation on the probability of this rule being made effective, and any likely timing is not productive! At the same time, there is some middle ground between wild speculation and having one's head in the sand. The real determining factors are probably more to do with political capital than any objective analysis of the actual issue. Very sad to me!
With that in mind, and considering that the initial filing of the rule may have been the bigger political hurdle, I estimate a 65% probability that the rule will carry the regulatory process.
It is going to take the EPA some time to complete their formal responses to comments. They need to be responded to in writing. And each response requires a formal review process. I believe that there will be a delay in completing the known 212 responses. But, a delay is quite different from a legal challenge. The unknown factor, known only to an inner circle of the ADA.
There is no doubt that any unfettered discharge of amalgam mercury into our public sewers is not good. Exactly how "not good" in the bigger scheme of life is less certain. There is also no doubt that self regulation is less onerous than Federal regulation. It is probably too late. But I do encourage all dentists to step forwards and take voluntary action. The best way I know to avoid regulation, is to eliminate it's need.
